Peace at gunpoint

I've been asked several times... What drives people to killing an innocent human in cold blood? The question to ask is... What does this man FEEL while killing another? Does he feel anything at all? What should be done when such a man has an innocent man, woman or child at gunpoint? Negotiate?

This is the primary function of the UN peacekeeping forces, keeping peace at gunpoint. Using the gun when there is no other way. But, if we think about putting an essentially supra-national humanitarian peacekeeping force that steps in to stop all forms of violence inflicted on innocent people, we cannot possibly think of putting this force under the control of an organization that derives its legitimacy from its member states. These member states have a complex mesh of national political interests at stake that prevents them from taking purely global humanitarian decisions.

So what is the ideal solution?

Creating an armed peacekeeping group not controlled by any nation but by a single truly supra-national organization. What will be required for legitimate intervention is endorsement by nations, especially the government of the nation that is a becoming a victim to mindless violence. Now, what if the government in question is either the cause of the problem or defunct? What becomes necessary in this case is circumventing the system.

Though unfortunate, the reality is this... To be effective in humanitarian intervention, states must be circumvented. The condition of sovereignty stands valid only if the state is effectively responding to violence being inflicted upon it's innocent citizens. So, logically speaking, circumvention is justified. Realistically speaking, such an organization would quickly become illegal... some might even label it as a terrorist group forcing it to go underground.

So this peacekeeping group will need funds. Where will that come from? Governments are out. Private sources are the only solution apart from self-sustaining projects. It will definitely require a huge fund base to fight maniacs with guns and politicians with words.

Shudders

I shuddered with anger today. The kind of anger that brings me tears. The kind of anger that stems from my respect for humans... for mankind.

I felt this while flipping through a collection of some war photography covering inhuman acts of war through Afghanistan, Iran, Vietnam and other nations ravaged by human evil. Calling man an animal for this behaviour would not do justice to any animal. Animals kill to survive. Man begins to feel sadistic pleasure while inflicting pain and death around him. Animals aren't capable of cruelty. Only man can feel pure cruelty.

Mangled, bloody bodies grovelling in the dust and debris of the world fallen around them devastated by grenades and bullets. Faces of humans contorted with wrath, weilding guns and batons, looming over another human who is cowering for his life... his very existence. I saw evil in those eyes.

The brilliance of mankind overpowered by evil! A man staring coldly at another man squinting in helpless anguish with a revolver stabbed against his temple seconds before his death. Right wing activists slamming a chair against the head of a dead leftist already hanged with his body already broken. People surrounding this scene some staring coldly, some in awe and some smiling. I won't describe the smile.

WHY?!

Taking pleasure in another man's suffering. What could instigate such a feeling in man? Why?

Making human life the equivalent of a twig that can be broken at the whim of a fanatic. Why? Don't they see the potential and value of human lives? Don't they love themselves? Don't they feel?

Politics! It's horrendous just to imagine the honchos doing the high-level diplomatic talk while nations destroy each other. Not addressing the loss of lives but the protection of some amorphous concept of 'society'! Are those people who are killing themselves and killing others not part of this damn society of theirs!

What is the solution? To destroy the people who are already dead... I wonder if there is an alternative... Until then I will believe in and do what is most necessary when it is most necessary.